|
Post by boxcarwilly on Jun 12, 2013 12:19:04 GMT -5
Like I said, speed is all relative to the engines you use and the lashups you put together. I don't run DCC because it's far too expensive for my taste, but for what I have generally speaking I'm satisfied and I get good performance from all my engines. I like to keep my trains going at a scale speed of 50 mph. I figure that's a realistic speed for a main line freight. Of course going up grades will slow the speed down depending on the consist but that's to be expected. When I want to run mixed engines I put them on the same track and see which one goes the fastest. This engine becomes my lead, and then the next fastest goes number two and so on and so fourth and such like until I have the desired number of engines ready for the cars. It's really the only way I can do this since I don't run DCC. All my engines are numbered according to type, and I have a notebook where I have the engine numbers and how fast they run on a scale of 1 to 10. Complicated? Well perhaps, but it works for me. Since Mark enlighten me re: speed and manufacturers specs, I'll be happy with what I have right now with this particular 38.. But since getting it back from AZL, I have yet to try it pulling my heavyweights which is what it was originally purchased for. I'm hoping it will do better this time around. Rob. You will have to correct the sign you have in the background of your picture. Z scale is no longer the smallest scale. T scale is smaller still.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Jun 11, 2013 11:35:42 GMT -5
Mark: You present an extremely interesting perspective to my problem. I confess that I had not even considered the fact that my other two 38's were running faster then AZL specs called for and the slower one is actually within specs as indicated by Rob K's testing. If that is actually the case, and I'm thinking more and more that it is perfectly logical, then the problem isn't within my layout. I have been away from my layout for several days due to health issues and yesterday was the first day I've actually spent on it but I didn't do any testing of locos. I've been thinking about my problem during that period and trying to come up with ways to determine the issues here. But in reading you remarks, I think a light bulb just went on. When you get right down to it, the difference in speed doesn't really matter all that much since the two best performing 38's or higher speed if you prefer, as of the same livery and therefore run on a separate line then the slower 38 which has it's own line. When this is taken into account, speed no longer becomes the issue. The other thing to consider here is that both lines have their own power source so if one source doesn't put out the same power as the other, it doesn't matter. As long as I don't put both liveries on the same track, everything is just peachy. Interestingly, when I compare the speed of the two best running 38's to that of MTL's GP 35's they are slightly slower, but when compared to MTL's SD40-2's, they are slightly faster. Now when I take my slower AZL 38 and compare the speed to that of AZL's SD75's it is about the same speed and slightly faster then MTL's SD40's and much slower then MTL's GP9's. So in all of this, you have to draw your own conclusions. I guess speed really becomes relative to the consist you lash up to. It's all so technical and my mind is beginning to hurt.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Jun 3, 2013 11:33:38 GMT -5
Dave. I do have a meter that my dad gave me years ago, and it is from the 1950's, but unfortunately, I don't know how to use it because I no longer have the instructions as to how to use it, and I can't remember what my dad said as to how to use it. Rob A. The speed was an estimate based on the positioning of the throttle on my power pack in relation to the other two 38's. The difference in the speed I estimated and what you got according to your instruments is based only on observation and perception. Without having the proper instrumentation, my 66% might equal your 30%. I think what I should have done in my initial tests is time each unit as to how long they took to complete one circuit of my layout. It never occurred to me to do that. Perhaps I should do that now. Be that as it may, if this Geep ran within tolerances on your test track and such was indicated with your instruments, then I can't dispute that fact. I therefore have to believe that the problem is in my layout. There is no other possible explanation. I have ruled out any of my power packs based on the performance of all my other engines. I think I'll invest in a new meter and learn how to use it. Perhaps that will give me some insight as to what is happening here. It might help me with my signalling issues as well. I do appreciate Rob K absorbing the shipping charges.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Jun 2, 2013 9:36:01 GMT -5
Rob: I got my 38 back a few days ago and tried it on my layout yesterday. I wanted to see if there was any difference in it's performance since sending it back to you. I am sad to report that it still will not keep up to the other two 38's. They literally run rings around it. If there was nothing wrong with this unit when you tested it, then why is it so much slower then the others. In your private email to me regarding this unit, you suggested running it hooked to the other two. If the other two 38's were the same livery, that would certain solve my problem. You also suggested that the problem might be in my power pack. You mentioned several that might work better then the MRC Tech 220 of which I have 5. I have swapped out each of my 220's to determine if perhaps one might be better in power output then the other. After lengthy experiments, I saw no appreciable difference in any of them. As an aside, I tried running this engine in reverse and I could see no real difference in performance. Frankly, I just don't know what to do at this point. After the testing you did, I have to think that perhaps the problem is in my layout. But if all my engines, both AZL and MTL work very well as they are supposed to, then can that be the problem? I wondered if maybe there was a power drain somewhere, but ruled that out since 4 of my 5 PP's power separate lines and the fifth powers only signals, lights, turnouts and other accessories. I must confess that I am at a complete loss here and unfortunately, I have no one locally who can assist me in determining the cause of this problem. Sometimes being a Z-scaler in a city of HO and N scale train buffs can have it's disadvantages.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 28, 2013 12:06:56 GMT -5
You know, I can understand the reasoning for manufacturing AZL products in China because labour is so much cheaper there, but I really have to ask the question, doesn't it bother anyone at AZL that these workers get garbage wages in comparison to North American workers? It's no secret that the workers in these plants are treated like slaves and they get absolutely no benefits whatsoever much left a decent living wage. I have no doubt that on your tour you only saw what they wanted you to see, and hid the bad stuff from you. That's standard procedure. The other thing is the quality control issue. There is a lot of stuff coming out of China that is junk to put it mildly. Everything from electronics, to furniture to clothing to toys and on and on it goes. We have all bought things made in China only to have them fall apart or quit working. Appliances manufactured in China are only guaranteed to work for a maximum of 5 years. Some less then that. Those same appliances manufactured here would run forever it seemed. The same holds true for AZL engines and cars. Some of us have had problems with engines or cars that I'm sure we would not be having if they were made here on this continent. OK! So I may seem to be an alarmist to most people, but you can't deny the fact that their standards of quality can't be compared to home grown items. To sacrifice quality for quantity and price just doesn't cut it in my book. I would sooner pay more for an a GP38 if it was manufactured in North American by people who care and where high standards of quality are the rule and not the exception. But in the end I guess, how many bucks you spend to have something built, wins out over everything else. Oh for the good old days.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 7, 2013 12:21:00 GMT -5
Rob.
My engine is on it's way back to you for inspection and repair or replacement. I did test it before I packaged it up. No change. It just won't keep up to the other two.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 7, 2013 12:19:45 GMT -5
Mark, Which ever way you do it, consideration needs to be given for the placement of the lights or light board. The Rokuhan cars are ready built to accept their light board, but according to the diagram that Rob posted above, there doesn't seem to be a way to install a board on the roof without making some kind of modifications. However, what if the light board were installed on the floor with some kind of defusing system over the lights so that they are not truly visible through the windows, yet give off just the amount of light intensity you want? As for conductivity from the trucks to the lights, and using the side clip device as shown in the Rokuhan system, what if a four fingered clip could be mounted to the underside of the car between the truck and the car frame held in place by the bolster. It should be ultrathin so as not to increase the height on the car by any appreciable difference. Now from there two ultrathin wires could be run to a screw on the underside of the car just behind the trucks, one each side. These screws would hold the clip inside where the light board connects and gets it's power from. As in the Rokuhan example. I haven't been able to find the link to the guy who does lighting for European cars, but as I recall, he used a circuit board with about 5 or 6 lights on it, but at one end he had a rather large and ugly looking thing for power pickup. I don't know if it was a European style resistor or some kind of capacitor, but it was big enough to take up a lot of space at one end of the car. there seemed to be a lot of wires coming from it as well. I think he cemented the board to the roof of the car as well. Not a good idea I'm thinking. I agree with you about standardization of a lighting system. I think they only way anything like this would ever come into play is from an aftermarket manufacturer. But it probably won't happen in my lifetime.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 4, 2013 10:52:43 GMT -5
I was just looking at the Rokuhan lighting system for their passenger cars and this would be perfect I think for AZL, MTL, or Marklin passenger cars if there was someway to secure the board to the roof of the car. I like the idea of a conductive spring attaching the board to a clip on the floor of the car. But what it doesn't show is where the power is coming from. Obviously it is being picked up from the wheels on the track for sure, but what method is being used? For North American style cars, perhaps as Mark suggested, some kind of wheelwiper cold be designed to conduct the power from the track to the clip where the spring attaches. However, it would have to be long enough and flexible enough to turn with the truck. But how about running a single piece of conductive metal from the clip to the metal axle. There could be one on the forward axle and one on the aft. I don't know if you'd need to do both trucks. I guess it depends on how you wire the lights. You could also use lights with varying intensity of brightness. Dim for sleepers and baggage cars, medium for diners and observation cars, and very bright for parlor cars or plain coaches. You'd probably need some kind of resistor to step down the power from the tracks to the lights to avoid burnout.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 4, 2013 10:39:24 GMT -5
Years ago when I was modelling in HO, I bought a baggage car that was lighted. As I think back on it now, it was very, very basic. There were three grain of wheat light bulbs hooked in series inside with two wires that ran down to a metal screw bolster at each end. On the underside where the bolster joined the truck to the frame was a conductive piece of copper with four fingers two each side, that ran out and down and touched the metal axles just inside the wheels on each truck. It worked very well as I recall. The copper fingers were held to the truck with the metal screw bolster. I don't know if anything like that would be feasible here, but it certainly was simple enough. That car was the only passenger style car I had as it wasn't long after that, my HO trains sort of took a back seat to girls. The rest, as they say, is history.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on May 3, 2013 12:33:12 GMT -5
Interior lighting after market installation would be an excellent way to keep the cost down provided it is simple to install and doesn't take someone with a degree in electrical engineering to do it. A couple of years ago, I was looking at adding lighting to my MTL cabooses and when I couldn't find something that was ready made and easy to install, I went searching and found a guy on Ebay who was adding ditch lights and other such lights to Z and N scale engines and then selling them. He also did the same with cabooses and added marker lights upon request and only charged 50.00 per car. I asked him if he could do passenger cars as well, thinking ahead, and he said he could for the same price as a caboose, but because I didn't have any at the time, I never bother to pursue it. I haven't seen him on Ebay lately so I don't know if he is still doing it, and I didn't think at the time to get his information. Stupid me. There is a guy in England though that makes and installs lighting for British or European passenger cars, and I found him through a link on Google, but I haven't looked for him in months. Don't know what he charges again because I didn't have any at the time. I should hunt for both these guys again.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Apr 29, 2013 10:59:14 GMT -5
Well I've done all the experimenting I can with this engine except taking it apart and I'm not going to do that since it will void the warranty. so the only choice I have left is to send it back to AZL for further testing or whatever. This is so disappointing. Out of three 38's this one just doesn't want to perform like the others. I just don't know.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Apr 29, 2013 10:56:34 GMT -5
You should be able to upload your images to the site using the attachment box on the full reply page. I'm interested in seeing what you have.
Sorry Mark, but I this webpage won't let me post the pics. It says it is copyrighted material. There's no way I can see to post the pics I found.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Apr 28, 2013 9:51:10 GMT -5
Rob. I found a few pics of the sleeping cars I have been referring to but I don't know how to bring them to this message box. Oh well.
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Apr 28, 2013 9:22:13 GMT -5
Hi Rob.
It could very well be that the cars I have been referring to are lightweights. I confess I don't know the difference except that some coaches have 6 wheel trucks and some 4. The top picture is close to those I've seen here only the center grouping of windows was situated at one end of the car and the bottom windows would be bigger and the upper windows less so. Not at all like the second picture. I'll have to see if I can find a pic or two of those I refer too. I've seen pictures of the inside of the sleepers on old movies but they just show the aisle with the berths on both sides covered with curtains. You can't actually see into any of the berths. And you can't tell if there are compartments or lavatories at the ends of the cars. The third picture may be closer to what I've seen but this looks like a compartment and not berths opening onto a central aisle. This looks like Cary Grant. Who's the girl?
|
|
|
Post by boxcarwilly on Apr 26, 2013 9:18:23 GMT -5
I really couldn't say if the sleepers I'm referring to were heavyweights or lightweights or even middleweights. All I know is I remember seeing these on passenger trains coming through my town when I was a boy. Via Rail in Canada still has a few of these only the entire car is not upper/lower births. There are compartments or roomettes as you call them combined in these cars as well. I was just curious.
|
|